Goblin Squad Member
|
@Ryan
With the alignment issues with directly dealing/trading with CE characters... one work around would seem to be to go to location X in the wilds with both characters, one character drops some goods, the other player picks them up.
I think your ideas sound brilliant, I just hope that there is some real thought and action put in to stopping these work arounds.
Dude this kind of thing sounds real easy sitting there typing, but it's a major pain in the rubber spider to actually have to go through hoops for every transaction.
Like I said before, AoC was a game "made by wolves for wolves" just like EVE, and NOBODY wanted those criminal points when they kicked in. Not being able to trade at will sucks and gets tired real quick.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
... Plus at some point anything that successfully evades the intended cost for a behavior becomes exploiting a bug.In the past, prior to 1999, I could see this being a deterrent.
Today? The motto of every MMO player I know is: "Exploit Early, Exploit Often" because there are zero consequences. Zero. Zilch. Nada.
Wait. What? I've been playing MMOs for a while and this is the first I've heard that motto. An exploit is something you bring to devs' attentions so the can get fixed.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@avari3/Jiminy: Yes, yes I am concerned. Why? Because if they don't have solutions to the problems that have plagued Shadowbane, UO, Mortal Online, Darkfall, and any other MMO that features "PvP as content" , then on what basis is there confidence their solution will be different?
If "they're just starting to look at this NOW", and they've already burned how many hundreds of thousands of dollars, they may not EVER find the solution ... and still have burned hundreds of thousands of dollars. Seeing the reason for concern, now?
UO was in development less than two years and only had one experienced multi-player game dev (Ralph Koster). I'm not as familiar with the other games you mentioned, but the fact is, developers learn from the mistakes (and successes) of others. There is a stark difference from the way those games were developed to the way PFO is being developed.
Once again, I would prefer them to get the core mechanics bedded down, then worry about controls to deal with griefers - especially the niche griefers you'r talking about (levelling up first then going rogue).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Wait. What? I've been playing MMOs for a while and this is the first I've heard that motto. An exploit is something you bring to devs' attentions so the can get fixed.... Plus at some point anything that successfully evades the intended cost for a behavior becomes exploiting a bug.In the past, prior to 1999, I could see this being a deterrent.
Today? The motto of every MMO player I know is: "Exploit Early, Exploit Often" because there are zero consequences. Zero. Zilch. Nada.
It depends on the community and game type. Most F2P games do have a large number of exploiting gamers who live for that. I find most P2P gamers are against it and are quick to call exploiters out and get them banned. Some F2P communities are solid enough where they do this as well, but they are less frequent.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Ryan
With the alignment issues with directly dealing/trading with CE characters... one work around would seem to be to go to location X in the wilds with both characters, one character drops some goods, the other player picks them up.
I think your ideas sound brilliant, I just hope that there is some real thought and action put in to stopping these work arounds.
Dude this kind of thing sounds real easy sitting there typing, but it's a major pain in the rubber spider to actually have to go through hoops for every transaction.
Like I said before, AoC was a game "made by wolves for wolves" just like EVE, and NOBODY wanted those criminal points when they kicked in. Not being able to trade at will sucks and gets tired real quick.
Oh I know, I expect some laundering to happen, but I dont want it to be easy or common. I am certainly not in the anti-PvP boat, I just want them to be sure to cover all of the bases if possible.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@avari3/Jiminy: Yes, yes I am concerned. Why? Because if they don't have solutions to the problems that have plagued Shadowbane, UO, Mortal Online, Darkfall, and any other MMO that features "PvP as content" , then on what basis is there confidence their solution will be different?
Listen my friend, every PvP game developer ever in history, could have stopped ganking if they wanted to. If the devs of this game wanted to, they could slap penalties and make systems so brutal that PFo would play liek a PVE game even though it was PvP enabled.
If they wanted to...
Two years out from Beta the biggest thing we have to go on is GW here on the forums and in the blogs telling us day in and day out that their vision is for a PvP game that is anti ganking.
I can tell you till I am blue that I have read the comments by Dancey and Co. and that i truly believe they "get it" and that THAT is the biggest deterant to ganking a game has ever needed. It's not in X system or Y script, it's in the devs truly believing that the game will be better off in the long run getting rid of these arsehats instead of taking their money in the short term.
And then you will tell me until you are blue that you've heard it all before and your heart is broken from past games and trust me I get it , I have been burnt by many a game as well.
My recommendation to you is don't pledge. Hey I'd like to see you pledge and I really want to see the drive go through, but some of us are going to need to see it before they believe it and that's that and I get it.
But i'll say this, forget about the specifics to systems that are going to be playtested to death later anyways. Pay attention to what these guys are saying and how often they are saying it. If all that time they have spent posting is lies to get my $100, F it I play for 4 months and I'm out. I've blown $100 in worse ways for lesser lies.
RE: Darkfall. Bad example IMHO, that game set out from the very begining to be the "most hardcore Pvp game ever". You don't see any of that kind of talk around here.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It depends on the community and game type. Most F2P games do have a large number of exploiting gamers who live for that. I find most P2P gamers are against it and are quick to call exploiters out and get them banned. Some F2P communities are solid enough where they do this as well, but they are less frequent.
I think Community is one of the most important things that will be built in the Beta. Besides the in game setbacks that will happen to gankers, the view that the playing population takes will have a lot to do with how the game plays out.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I love so much of what I'm hearing about the PvP elements of this game. Some of my favorite moments in MMOs are from open world PvP; a game that embraces and encourages this side of MMOs is something I (and apparently much of the community anticipating this game) have wanted for a long time.
A love for the Pathfinder world and brand are what got me looking into this game to start with as well, but what got me to stay and pledge $100 is the game GW has envisioned, it's one that doesn't exist, and one I'm excited to see and play.
I understand frustration or disappointment from those who prefer PvE, and want to be able to enjoy PFO. They love Pathfinder, and found out they're making an MMO and got excited, only to find out it has strong PvP leanings, something they don't want at all. That must suck.
But at the same time, that disappointment that this MMO isn't what you want? That's something that a lot of us that want this type of game so much feel for almost all MMOs.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm a little confused now to be honest. I certainly appreciate the intention to make things tough for Chaotic Evil characters, though it does somewhat make me wonder why let people do actions to become CE if the intent is to make things so tough on them that nobody wants to become that alignment.
My confusion though is more because a while back some posters were answering concerns by pointing out that the power curve is going to be pretty gentle. Both in terms of what you gain in character power and in power based off equipment, with the argument having been that a small group of newbies should be able to hold off one or two maxed out characters even should they be picked on. But if that's indeed the case then the only thing stopping a reasonable CE bandit gang forming is numbers isn't it? If the power curve is that gentle then the relative lack of facilities that a CE group can get isn't such a major handicap. If their only goal is to cause havoc presumably a group can do that from day 1 by just running off and making a rudimentary base in the forests or some such place.
So I guess I'm asking, is the power curve really not that gently sloping after all? Or is the progress of a CE character going to be restricted in such a way that they're even weaker than most others are starting out?
I think it's a case of numbers in that just about EVERYONE they come across will be better skilled and better equipped than them, and even if they do get the equipment, they can't use it as effectively, so they start killing, along comes a group of LG players and they stand no chance.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well yeah, but if better skills and better equipment don't mean that much as per my earlier understanding then it's more a matter of organisation. Can 10 of them beat 5 stronger characters in an ambush? 4? 3? If they pick their spot well enough I wouldn't imagine that the chances of a second group turning up while the ambush is going on is all that likely.
Personally I'd be happy enough if it's just that the power curve is steeper than I was earlier lead to believe. But something in my expectations is apparently off and I'm curious what.
It'll probably take some balancing, so we will see what they have in mind once we get to alpha and beta testing!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How many people do you see in the real world that truly qualify as Chaotic Evil? The impression I get from the devs is that they want to give you the freedom to screw up. This game isn't one designed to let the sociopath reign free. It's designed to have meaningful player interaction. And that extends to those that want to be a!#hats too. If you want to be a jerk and kill a bunch of people, you're going to learn that life gets difficult when you're a sociopathic murderer.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Berik
I would expect it to be a little steeper than is being said. There are a lot of players, including my self at one time, that really played the gap down, but every time Ryan chimes into those discussions and I'm led to believe there will be a noticeable gap.
I wouldn't expect 20 fresh characters to hold their own against a 4 year vet, but give them a few days of training, and some organization and they could probably take the vet down.
As for the CE stuff, CE players won't be going out and doing dungeons and harvesting, most likely, they will be getting the majority of their goods from raiding other players after they do dungeons and stuff. Instead of doing the work up front, they get a harder life in the long run. The non-CE players see an immediate downside, while the CE character's downside slowly builds up, the downside is low in the beginning, but quickly surpasses that of the non-CE player.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I think your explanation is the most likely one and also the one that I'd prefer Valkenr. I'd like to think that griefing behaviour is more likely to come from less powerful players, so having one or two good samaritan powerful characters prepared to help out the occasional newbie would help a lot.
Say hello to the Great Legionaries, now known as The Empyrean Order. We exist to combat griefers and promote positive gameplay, including teaching new players the ropes, chasing down griefers and ending them, and generally being a force for good.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Yeah, I think your explanation is the most likely one and also the one that I'd prefer Valkenr. I'd like to think that griefing behaviour is more likely to come from less powerful players, so having one or two good samaritan powerful characters prepared to help out the occasional newbie would help a lot.
Griefing will come from two major places:
1. New players that don't understand the established social contract. They'll do things like ninja-loot, and monster dragging.2. Established characters that are getting their Asses handed to them and cant compete at their 'level'. This happens in EVE, the older advanced players that can't handle null-sec sit in hi-sec and declare wars with smaller companies they can easily hunt, and they can basically lock you in a station(had to deal with this a week ago).
In my experience, when you have sore-losers griefing the noob zones, just a few 'high level' pvp guys can come cut them down without much effort. The skilled guys are usually trying to accumulate wealth, and killing noobs doesn't give you anything, and in the case of PFO, you only get negative effects. Unless you are trying to dive into a CE character.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
.. argument having been that a small group of newbies should be able to hold off one or two maxed out characters...
The terminology, according to the video by Lee and Stephen, is: "jumped by a bunch of low levels" so with 'bunch' I think 10, and the use of 'jumped' leads me to think the 'high level' would have to be not paying attention, and tag on to that(also from the video), "especially if they aren't wearing their best gear." So lets ball-park it at 15 'low levels' for each prepared and well geared 'high level'
But seriously though, don't take my estimates seriously, I know game devs hate it when people do this kind of analysis. The only company I'm OK with doing this to without a disclaimer is SOE, because I hate them, and always well, they screwed up Star Wars, and now DC(my two favorite fictional universes), and I will never forgive them. Sorry... I have to slam SOE at every opportunity...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Being CE will be one hell of a ride. Only very few will be able to stomach this but these few can become "legends", likely hated by many, but there is no deniing their skill and, above all, persistence.
It's these mechanics that make "real content", something memorable, something to last.
And if that means that now and then I will bite my keyboard (likely because I was the one being stupid) then that is what it means.
@ Mr Dancey :
Is Chaotic Good a viable alignment ?
How would one reach it ?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll just sit back and smile while all the guys mocking PvE fans get ganked by griefers.
Meanwhile I'll probably enjoy some good PvE oriented MMO without the risk of my fun being ruined.
Here's my solution, let people drop stuff in campsites, make them party based, so any exchanges of items count as a trade.
Then again, what about robbery, diplomacy (peace offerings) and extortion?
There are reasons you may want or need to trade with opposing factions.
I didn't see this addressed, so I'm highlighting it. I plan to play a bard, which is a pretty good fit (eventually) for a diplomatic role. I'd hate to take reputation hits in dealing with evil-aligned diplomats.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Here's my solution, let people drop stuff in campsites, make them party based, so any exchanges of items count as a trade.
Then again, what about robbery, diplomacy (peace offerings) and extortion?
There are reasons you may want or need to trade with opposing factions.
I didn't see this addressed, so I'm highlighting it. I plan to play a bard, which is a pretty good fit (eventually) for a diplomatic role. I'd hate to take reputation hits in dealing with evil-aligned diplomats.
Diplomat Bards aren't usually LG for that very reason are they? ;) You are supposed to be "that character" that can talk to both sides. I am very excited about the RP possibilities all of this opens up for the nuetrals.
Diplomat Bards aren't usually LG for that very reason are they? ;) You are supposed to be "that character" that can talk to both sides. I am very excited about the RP possibilities all of this opens up for the nuetrals.Here's my solution, let people drop stuff in campsites, make them party based, so any exchanges of items count as a trade.
Then again, what about robbery, diplomacy (peace offerings) and extortion?
There are reasons you may want or need to trade with opposing factions.
I didn't see this addressed, so I'm highlighting it. I plan to play a bard, which is a pretty good fit (eventually) for a diplomatic role. I'd hate to take reputation hits in dealing with evil-aligned diplomats.
Exactly - there are great RP possibilities if I'm not constantly taking erputation hits (for good or evil (because the alignments of those I'll be dealing with will depend on circumstance). Talking alone, of course, shouldn't involve an alignment effect, but how sensitive is the system if, in the interests of my settlement, I exchange gifts with either a LG or CE leader?
I may of course be making a mountain out of a molehill. It's been years since I played with an alignment system in place.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
1) The player cannot reach the highest levels of training, EVER, as chaotic evil, period? No matter what, that alignment cannot reach max skill/whatever, EVER? That will not be well received with those players desiring to play CE for any reason, but I'm curious all the same.2) CE players cannot construct settlement?. Again, that too would not be well received by players currently planning 100% CE settlements of the highest quality.
That's the whole point. Being CE will suck, badly. I doubt there will by any player guilds that plan on being CE. If they do, they won't have much fun and their rate of attrition will be high. CE players will likely be ones who come to the game new, believe they can get away with ganking, and attempt to engage in that behavior. Very few of them will stick around for long once they realize what a disadvantage they are at.
Most people who are interested in PvP will engage in non-griefing pvp behavior. Attacking players who belong to settlements they are at war with, or an occasional player who is obviously carrying high-value resources and is under-protected (even this I think most will shy away from doing because of the risk of gaining powerful enemies).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
1) The player cannot reach the highest levels of training, EVER, as chaotic evil, period? No matter what, that alignment cannot reach max skill/whatever, EVER? That will not be well received with those players desiring to play CE for any reason, but I'm curious all the same.2) CE players cannot construct settlement?. Again, that too would not be well received by players currently planning 100% CE settlements of the highest quality.
That's the whole point. Being CE will suck, badly. I doubt there will by any player guilds that plan on being CE. If they do, they won't have much fun and their rate of attrition will be high. CE players will likely be ones who come to the game new, believe they can get away with ganking, and attempt to engage in that behavior. Very few of them will stick around for long once they realize what a disadvantage they are at.
Most people who are interested in PvP will engage in non-griefing pvp behavior. Attacking players who belong to settlements they are at war with, or an occasional player who is obviously carrying high-value resources and is under-protected (even this I think most will shy away from doing because of the risk of gaining powerful enemies).
The Gary Gygax alignment system is pretty clear about chaotics of all creeds being notorious for their inability to create prolonged societies. It's the lawful nations that create the big cities/nation powers.
CG nations are just bands of anti-heroes/rebels or wardens that belong to no nation.
CN nations are just rag tag mercenary bands or bandits when the going gets rough.
CE nations are just murderous barbarian hordes, usually from the monstrous races.
That's the way it is in the Pathfinder TT game and there will finally be a game that properly reflects it.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that advanced players will take on the challenge of CG/CN nations and gankers will finally be treated as they should be...like monsters with a killer AI.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Just my opinion here, but...
If a character provides a non-threatening service to another that is of evil alignment, since the first character will not inherently know that person is evil, then there should be no penalty from say trading or healing that character. Otherwise, you encourage avoidance really.
This is where it gets really hard to create a gaming system for alignment interactions because you have to translate so many factors into the code.
If I sell you a knife because people use knives to cut rope, whittle toys, or prepare food. That's not evil. If I sell you a knife because I know you want to stab Elminster behind the Tasty-Freeze...then yeah...
If I heal you because I find you dying in a ditch, that's actually a GOOD act. If I watch you attack a nun and heal you after she whips you with her ruler...evil.
Unless we can inherently see alignment (which I don't think we'll be able to) then I don't think mundane actions should have effects on alignments.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The Gary Gygax alignment system is pretty clear about chaotics of all creeds being notorious for their inability to create prolonged societies. It's the lawful nations that create the big cities/nation powers.
CG nations are just bands of anti-heroes/rebels or wardens that belong to no nation.
CN nations are just rag tag mercenary bands or bandits when the going gets rough.
CE nations are just murderous barbarian hordes, usually from the monstrous races.
That's the way it is in the Pathfinder TT game and there will finally be a game that properly reflects it.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that advanced players will take on the challenge of CG/CN nations and gankers will finally be treated as they should be...like monsters with a...
No, this is the original single axis alignment system which has been greatly improved upon conceptually. I think that it represents an absurdly reductive view of what the law-chaos axis of the alignment system really is now.
CG nations are not just anything. A CG nation is a vibrant, democratic society where people's rights to privacy and expression are protected, unlike in the Lawful states which are probably police state dictatorships even if the police are all paladins and the dictator is a philosopher-king.
Likewise for CN. An example of a functional CN nation would be a mercenary legion run like a corporation where the soldiers themselves are the stockholders. They can vote in shareholder meetings, they share in the profits and glory and they can vote with their feet and sell their shares off to leave with their profits whenever they want. Nothing Rag-tag about it, and they would never stoop to banditry.
I agree with you about CE settlements though.
That's the way it is in the Pathfinder TT game and there will finally be a game that properly reflects it.
I have never seen the TTRPG alignment run in such a simplistic and reductive fashion, it's really not the way it is.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The Gary Gygax alignment system is pretty clear about chaotics of all creeds being notorious for their inability to create prolonged societies. It's the lawful nations that create the big cities/nation powers.
CG nations are just bands of anti-heroes/rebels or wardens that belong to no nation.
CN nations are just rag tag mercenary bands or bandits when the going gets rough.
CE nations are just murderous barbarian hordes, usually from the monstrous races.
That's the way it is in the Pathfinder TT game and there will finally be a game that properly reflects it.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that advanced players will take on the challenge of CG/CN nations and gankers will finally be treated as they should be...like monsters with a...
No, this is the original single axis alignment system which has been greatly improved upon conceptually. I think that it represents an absurdly reductive view of what the law-chaos axis of the alignment system really is now.
CG nations are not just anything. A CG nation is a vibrant, democratic society where people's rights to privacy and expression are protected, unlike in the Lawful states which are probably police state dictatorships even if the police are all paladins and the dictator is a philosopher-king.
Likewise for CN. An example of a functional CN nation would be a mercenary legion run like a corporation where the soldiers themselves are the stockholders. They can vote in shareholder meetings, they share in the profits and glory and they can vote with their feet and sell their shares off to leave with their profits whenever they want. Nothing Rag-tag about it, and they would never stoop to banditry.
I agree with you about CE settlements though.
That's the way it is in the Pathfinder TT game and there will finally be a game that properly reflects it.I have never seen the TTRPG alignment run in such a simplistic and reductive fashion, it's really not the way it is.
Sorry dude but I disagree with you. At no point in time have I or will I ever tell you that the alignment axis is an accurate portrayal of human morality. I'm only going by what the alignment game mechanic means in dungeons and dragons/pathfinder.
Chaotic Good can be a vibrant community. A hippie community that drinks ayahuasca all day and lives off the land like the Radical Faeries is a pretty good modern day example of Chaotic Good community. A group of artistic squatters can be chaotic good.
Large nations will often have a chaotic king or reign, but it's very rare for a large nation to stay chaotic at the top (the fey nations are an exception). Never said it was impossible.
The mercenary example is clearly true nuetral or even LN, not CN. The more organized mercenary groups tend to be LN or N, not CN. CN is the most indivualistic alignment of them all.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Diplomat Bards aren't usually LG for that very reason are they? ;) You are supposed to be "that character" that can talk to both sides. I am very excited about the RP possibilities all of this opens up for the nuetrals.Exactly - there are great RP possibilities if I'm not constantly taking erputation hits (for good or evil (because the alignments of those I'll be dealing with will depend on circumstance). Talking alone, of course, shouldn't involve an alignment effect, but how sensitive is the system if, in the interests of my settlement, I exchange gifts with either a LG or CE leader?
I may of course be making a mountain out of a molehill. It's been years since I played with an alignment system in place.
You can negotiate with the enemy if you want, but I will take no quarter in it! I shall inspire our troops to destroy such evil creatures!
-- Alantia Nightfall, Bard
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Lets look at the ambush scenario from the crafters viewpoint:
You as a crafter have spent a lot of time and effort crafting a wagonload of magic weapons to sell at a well-known fair at another town. You need them moved and put out a call for guards. The ambush happens and,
A) they are beaten off. No harm no foul onto the fair
B) they kill everyone and loot your wagon. Now, you Rez at whatever save point and you can put together a posse to hunt them, put bounties out on their heads (assuming you caught their names-I'm sure this will be easy to do), BUT...
You the craft master are out the loot. All that time, effort and gold wasted. You might kill the little jerks that stole it, someone might have a fun time arranging a revenge posse, but the likelihood of recovering that cache of weapons is likely nil, unless you have some way off immediately tracking them down and killing them. If they are smart they'll cache the loot quickly, as they won't want to lose the items they lost reputation for
Now, as that craftsman, I would be devastated. Assuming maybe I put in a full two weeks of game time crafting to make that stuff, it all seems worthless now. I am officially someone's NPC victim. The frustration would be intense, and a scenario like that would likely ruin any fun I had in the game for quite a while.
Like I said before, I understand that this game is set up a certain way. I am merely trying to explain what some of the concerns are for those of us not thrilled by PvP. Saying 'try it you'll like it' doesn't help. Neither does 'just join a big company'. If those are the choices, then it's going to turn off a segment of the population. I'm going to try it, but I am also going to make my concerns known.
You are playing Monopoly, you just landed on someone elses "Park Place" with a hotel on it. Sucks, but thats part of what makes it a GAME (i.e. contains the possibility of both winning and losing). It may well not be the experience you are looking for, that's ok too. Bottom line the possibility of loosing something occasionaly is pretty integral to the basic design of PFO. Though a player can mitigate the risk of loosing things (and certainly avoiding putting 2 weeks worth of work in one basket would be part of that) you can never really mitigate that risk down to zero....just like in monopoly you can never assure yourself that you'll have to pay out money. YMMV.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Sorry dude but I disagree with you. At no point in time have I or will I ever tell you that the alignment axis is an accurate portrayal of human morality. I'm only going by what the alignment game mechanic means in dungeons and dragons/pathfinder.
Disagreement is good, otherwise we'll never have all the perspectives we need to make a system that works.
However, at some level the alignment system has to portray human morality because the game has to contain the ability to have realistic characters of the corner alignments without forcing them into silly little reductive boxes.
I agree that alignment is as absolute as you think it is in some situations, namely when you are dealing with outsiders and other supernatural creatures with alignment subtypes since they are literally made out of whatever alignment they are. When you are dealing with mortals who do not have alignment subtypes, it is nowhere near as extreme as you seem to think, otherwise all humans would always be neutral.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well it makes sense to think about it as a game and see how something like that actually helps the point of that game. Now with a sandbox we're very focused on the player.
So what do I get for being murdered and having everything I wasn't wearing stolen or destroyed? What experience is that trying to sell me on for enjoyment, emotional involvement or whatever is the point of things?
You get the possibility of LOSING (at least temporarly) which is something very few MMO's on the market offer. I don't know about you, but to me a game of Chess would be very boring if I knew I could never lose a piece, never lose a game. Monopoly would be boring if I knew I could never land on somebody elses territory and have to payout money. Risk would be boring if I knew I could never lose a territory.
Games, inherently by thier nature (IMO), contain both the possibility of victory and defeat. Modern MMO design has seemed to buck that basic design principle where the player is really never allowed to lose. Even if they do lose, the consequences are hardly noticable... go back to the last save point, go back to the last bind point, waste a few seconds worth of play.
PFO is not that sort of game, by design. It's not a game where you will ever die permanently...so you don't risk the game ending for you and thus permanent loss. However, it IS a game where if you choose to head out into the dangerous wilds of the River Kingdoms (e.g. out of "safe" NPC kingdoms) you WILL risk death, defeat and setbacks. How you deal with that depends upon how you mentaly envision the game...if you envision it as some bully kicking down the beautiful sand castles you are trying to build then it will likely be disturbing to you, but I can tell you categoricaly that is NOT the type of game GW is intending to design. Thier design is NOT one that is intended for folks to go around building sandcastles unmolested. If you approach it with the attitude of landing on someone elses hotel in monopoly or losing a territoy in risk, you'll be much more closely aligned toward the design intent of PFO. You will lose stuff occasionaly, you will suffer defeat, you will suffer setbacks and you will lose resources. You can mitigate alot of that, but you can't ever mitigate it down to zero. If that's the type of game you enjoy playing...then I think (hope) PFO will be fun for you.
Personaly, I'm a RP oriented player...and I do tend to get very emotionaly attached to my characters and sometimes thier gear. I know I won't ever lose my character permanently if they get defeated. I intend to approach the game from the standpoint of monopoly or risk....If my character gets killed and losing items..HE may not take that lightly...but my attitude toward that is going to be the same as losing a territory in a game of Risk. YMMV.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This game is not going to a fantasy MMO. This game is going to be a PVP survival fantasy MMO. Basically what the PVP people and the developers are saying is "If you dont want to get ganked then stay at home with the women and children". I have no problem with that since I would simply not play. But the developers should be clear about their intentions. I pledged in the original kickstarter and I already feel burned since it seems I wont be playing the game.
PVP people are always talking about the holy grail that is world PVP on message boards and how fun it is. Instead what you get in game, no matter the MMO is.
Level 9000 rogue in full stealth ganking a level 1 priest trying to gather herbs. This usually causes the poor player to scream "ITS OVER 9000!"
PVP guild that entertains itself raiding the low level zones or killing all the quest NPC's in a area.
Then there is always the guy that follows you around then suddenly turns on you when your health is half way down.
In 15 years of MMO experience from UO to EQ to WOW and now RIFT, I have never seen a single case of what I would call honorable PVP. I hope the game success. But its not looking to be the kind of game I would play. It looks like its going to be a hardcore PVP game with survival of the fittest in mind.
This games success will not depend on whether it is a sandbox MMO. It will depend on the community. I hope that those interested in making PFO a great experience for others will be the majority. I hope that there will be guilds that actually fight for justice in PFO. Band together because the CE players will work together to try to minimize the penalties for being Chaotic Evil. Anyone who thinks otherwise is just naive.
Dont let the griefers and those that are only interested in wealth dominate the game. And please don't let those people be the vocal majority on these boards. Those of you that get in early don't become elitist jerks to the newbies that join 2 or 3 years later. One of them could be me.
I hope that the game is a success for all backers. Disengaging from discussion.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Arslanxelan: That sounds like the opposite of what the devs desire. First off, There won't likely be quest NPCs. Secondly, NPC town raids won't be encouraged like it is in PvP WoW. Thirdly, There is no Level 9000 rogue and he will have a hard time getting to that newbie anyway because his reputation is so awful. Fourthly, If these CE types do band together, give the Empyrean Order a call and we'll sort them out!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
This game is not going to a fantasy MMO. This game is going to be a PVP survival fantasy MMO. Basically what the PVP people and the developers are saying is "If you dont want to get ganked then stay at home with the women and children". I have no problem with that since I would simply not play. But the developers should be clear about their intentions. I pledged in the original kickstarter and I already feel burned since it seems I wont be playing the game.
After following for nearly a year now I have yet to see them be anything but upfront and very clear about their intentions as well as limitations. From the first blog to the most recent of posts in this very thread. Honestly its quite refreshing and stark contrast to other developers who hide in secrecy building the game as they want it to be, then throw it all away trying to please everyone post release.
Not trying to be an ass here, its just hard to be sympathetic when my own experience is the extreme opposite from yours.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
PVP people are always talking about the holy grail that is world PVP on message boards and how fun it is. Instead what you get in game, no matter the MMO is.
Level 9000 rogue in full stealth ganking a level 1 priest trying to gather herbs. This usually causes the poor player to scream "ITS OVER 9000!"
PVP guild that entertains itself raiding the low level zones or killing all the quest NPC's in a area.
Then there is always the guy that follows you around then suddenly turns on you when your health is half way down.
This tells me you haven't bothered to listen to anything about the game design. You haven't bothered to read about power curves. You haven't bothered to read about alignment and reputation. You haven't bothered to learn about training, warfare, or rewards in the current design process.
You're just indulging yourself (which is easy) instead of thinking (which requires work).
Suggestion:
1) Read about the design process, so that you can see that what you said above is the literal, exact opposite of the design.
2) Come back and post something like "Oops, I just sorted of posted without context--my bad :)"
3) Given enough context and information to form a meaningful opinion, start contributing to the discussion in an informed way.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This game is not going to a fantasy MMO. This game is going to be a PVP survival fantasy MMO. Basically what the PVP people and the developers are saying is "If you dont want to get ganked then stay at home with the women and children". I have no problem with that since I would simply not play. But the developers should be clear about their intentions. I pledged in the original kickstarter and I already feel burned since it seems I wont be playing the game.
PVP people are always talking about the holy grail that is world PVP on message boards and how fun it is. Instead what you get in game, no matter the MMO is.
Level 9000 rogue in full stealth ganking a level 1 priest trying to gather herbs. This usually causes the poor player to scream "ITS OVER 9000!"
PVP guild that entertains itself raiding the low level zones or killing all the quest NPC's in a area.
Then there is always the guy that follows you around then suddenly turns on you when your health is half way down.
In 15 years of MMO experience from UO to EQ to WOW and now RIFT, I have never seen a single case of what I would call honorable PVP. I hope the game success. But its not looking to be the kind of game I would play. It looks like its going to be a hardcore PVP game with survival of the fittest in mind.
This games success will not depend on whether it is a sandbox MMO. It will depend on the community. I hope that those interested in making PFO a great experience for others will be the majority. I hope that there will be guilds that actually fight for justice in PFO. Band together because the CE players will work together to try to minimize the penalties for being Chaotic Evil. Anyone who thinks otherwise is just naive.
Dont let the griefers and those that are only interested in wealth dominate the game. And please don't let those people be the vocal majority on these boards. Those of you that get in early don't become elitist jerks to the newbies that join 2 or 3 years later. One of them could be me.
I hope that the game is...
I would urge you to reconsider. What you think is going to happen, there will be settlements where the CE people will never get, and as you progress (hex wise) further into unchartered territory the laws will be less strict and then to a point where players will police the law, these will be the zones where you will see the most pvp going to happen between the different alignments.
What is going to happen is that in the zones where the most protection from npc's are you will see people doing quests, crafting, trading etc. You will also see charters here that will help out the new players with a new player experience, a training academy so to say.
As for the fear of low lvl zones being raided by the CE charters, that might happen once in a while, they will die due to the defenses and patrols roaming around. But I am nearly sure that once this happens the charters that are willing to take the fight to the CE will step up and go after them and if needed be destroy their settlements, such will be the way of this game. It is going to be interesting!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Mbando: You're being a bit crass. There's no need to be so antagonistic about it. Perhaps providing information instead of berating them for not knowing it would be less off-putting. Not all of us can spend their days poring through all the threads and blogs like I do. If your goal is truly to help foster an informed discussion, you should extend an open hand and not a fist.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
"Chaotic Good can be a vibrant community. A hippie community that drinks ayahuasca all day and lives off the land like the Radical Faeries is a pretty good modern day example of Chaotic Good community. A group of artistic squatters can be chaotic good. "
Vibrant...yes
Viable...Mmmmm
Victorious....doubtful.
And that same hippie redoubt could be Lawful or Neutral Good. Even hippies and free-thinkers understand the need for rules, as long as they don't require bathing or prohibit patchouli.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This game is not going to a fantasy MMO. This game is going to be a PVP survival fantasy MMO. Basically what the PVP people and the developers are saying is "If you dont want to get ganked then stay at home with the women and children". I have no problem with that since I would simply not play. But the developers should be clear about their intentions.
I find it pretty unbelievable that somebody would still feel this way after all the information that is out there. This is simply not true at all. This game will be a fantastic game for 99% of the PVE players who hate PVP. It will not be a constant gank fest. At some point you're going to either put your faith in the developers or wait and see. There is obviously nothing we can say to you at this point that will change your mind.